Previous Entry | Next Entry

Batman: Arkham Knight trailer released...

Now, it's pretty, and the animation is astounding, so technically I can't fault it...




But on the emotional level...

Okay, call me the cranky misfit, but watching this my estimation of Thomas Wayne plummeted faster than a string of pearls in a dark alley.

1) He wrote this will in the assumption that he was going to outlive his wife. (Otherwise, Bruce surely wouldn’t be the SOLE beneficiary). What an asshole (Actually, she outlived him by a few moments, IIRC, so that'll teach HIM to make assumptions!)

2) There is not one single word about wanting his son to be happy, or even hope that he will have friends and/or family

Geez Thomas, I understand you stressing the importance of using the resources you’re bequeathing him well, but a bit of human empathy or goodwill towards your only child wouldn’t go amiss.

(My dad never left a heartfelt message for any of his kids in his will, but I know that the one thing he wanted for all his children was that we be HAPPY in our lives.)


Comments

( 7 comments — Leave a comment )
crabby_lioness
Mar. 4th, 2014 10:25 pm (UTC)
Time and place, hon. At that time and in that place it would have been considered unmanly for a upper-class WASP male to even mention happiness.
crabby_lioness
Mar. 4th, 2014 10:29 pm (UTC)
Here's a true story from that era, told to me in the 1970s: a man calls a shrink, "I need to talk to you. I'm depressed and IDK why."

"Can you come by tomorrow?"

"Oh, I can't do that. I have to go to my mother's funeral."
rdfox
Mar. 5th, 2014 04:10 am (UTC)
IANAL, but I believe that in the US, a husband and wife can be legally considered a single entity for estate purposes, so unless Thomas and Martha had a prenuptial agreement that limited her control over their assets, it would be a fair assumption that his will wouldn't be read unless both of them were dead.
icon_uk
Mar. 5th, 2014 07:49 am (UTC)
IANAL either (Though I had to google that acronym) but would such a situation ignore the other partner and their assets completely?

If Thomas died first, then would that limit Martha's ability to amend the will herself?

This doesn't seem like "their" will, it seems like "his" will.
misterandersen
Mar. 5th, 2014 05:55 am (UTC)
How surprising, yet another Batman universe that blatantly ignores Martha.

Seriously, how terrible is it that frakking Flashpoint did more with Martha to make her something other than simply a convenient womb than any other take on Batman?

Also no provisions for Alfred or the care and raising of Bruce? Just "Here's my money kid, don't be a douche".

And that Batmobile design is terrible.

Edited at 2014-03-05 05:57 am (UTC)
magus_69
Mar. 5th, 2014 06:25 am (UTC)
1-- I am no expert, but my knowledge indicates that rdfox is correct.

2-- I actually quite like the will. I think that all hopes for happiness would be covered under the lines about love (which are only emphasized because they came last). As for the rest: my headcanon, based on various bits of actual canon, is that the Wayne family takes noblesse oblige very, very seriously. Therefore, it makes perfect sense to me that Thomas would stress Bruce's duty and finish with the reminder that he is loved.
icon_uk
Mar. 5th, 2014 07:52 am (UTC)
It seems like a very selfish way of phrasing it, because it's all about how "I love you, even though I'm now dead", but nothing about

And depending on the iteration, it wasn't Thomas who had the noblesse oblige thing going on (though other Wayne's in the past had), it was Martha who taught Thomas (Who was a good man, but insular) to benefit the city and it's citizens as much as possible with the wealth that he'd had. He had the money, she had the sense of social repsonsibility.
( 7 comments — Leave a comment )